Gun Control And Mass Shootings

The two articles that I have read were “Connecticut School Shooting ‘An Attack on America’” by Ted Anthony and “The Price of Gun Control by Dan Baum. All around I believe these articles were both very interesting and both took different perspectives on the issues of guns in America. Both Anthony and Baum illustrated the different problems that we have in America and our communities with gun control and gun violence. But, they both brought the text together to relate it on a personal level. I enjoyed reading both texts and connecting to each one on a different level.

An ever increasing emphasis on the prevention of mass shootings has presented the option of gun control and bans. Mass shootings have occurred many times throughout history, but have

Imagine going to school where instead of worrying about a grade you got on a test, you have to worry about your school being the next victim of a mass shooting. The Second Amendment states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (United States Constitution), and yet instead of some people using their guns for self defense, they use it for mass shootings. Some argue that we already have gun control laws that don’t work, but others say if we had better gun laws than it would work. The debate on gun control started in November 22, 1963, when evidence in the assassination of president John F. Kennedy increased public awareness

Gun control should not exist at all in the United States. Mass shootings have almost become seen as normal event in the United States. What people do not understand is that gun control is not the answer; there are countries with little to no control that have fewer shootings. According to The Washington Post,Finland is ranked number 4 in countries with the most guns despite that they only had 24 homicides by firearm (“Gun homicides and ownership by countries” n.pag.) . In the article Did Gun Control Work In Australia “it is shown that gun control has reduced the problems but it still has not completely got rid of all firearm deaths”(Matthews n.pag.). The number of murders, homicides, or suicides do not go up due to people just owning more guns. Clayton Perry, a staff writer at the University of Maine, even points out “Stricter gun laws were in place during the Assault Weapons Ban between 1994 and 2004, but that didn't stop the shooters at Columbine in 1999 ”(Perry n. pag.). In Iceland, thirty out of a hundred people own a gun and they have zero homicides caused by guns a year(“Gun Homicides and ownership by country” n. pag.). In this day and age, everything is unpredictable, guns are a form of protection for everyone and there should not be restrictions on protection. The U.S. Department of Justice released a data brief that states, “ On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves or their property”(Rand BJS Statistician n. pag.). The National Sheriffs Association released that the average police response time is at eighteen minutes while the average school shooting only last twelve minutes (“Embracing Technology To Decrease Response Time” n. pag.). Gun control should not exist because other countries do fine without it , high gun ownership has no link with increasing death rates , and guns are not harmful when instructions are followed.

Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being

The occurence of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting of December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut. The gunman, was 20-year-old Adam Lana, who first shot and killed his mother at their Newtown home. He then drove to Sandy Hook Elementary School where he fatally shot 20 children and 6 adult staff members. As first responders arrived, Lana committed suicide by shooting himself in the head. The shooting began at approximately 9:30 a.m. Sandy Hook was the deadliest mass shooting at a high school or grade school in U.S. history and the second-deadliest mass shooting by a single person in U.S. history, after the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre. This shooting yet again assured the nation that gun violence is still as big of a problem as it was back in the late 90’s when 27 teenagers got killed in another mass killing in Columbine, Colorado. We as a nation must stand up and oppose mass murdering because these actions are not only unjust but inhuman as well.  The increase in gun violence can be decreased by, identifying the regions in the country where the most gun violence occurs and restricting their access to limiting or monitoring the availability of guns and ammunition.

The article, “The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control: Crime and killings have fallen as gun ownership has increased”, was written in a manner to target a specific audience by using a current hot topic amongst politicians in the United States on gun control. By discussing recent mass shooting, the author is able to appeal to his audience with Ethos appeal allowing him to maintain the attention of the audience, which, otherwise would be overlooked by people outside his target audience.

The second amendment of the United States reads, “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (Constitution). This has started a huge debate on whether or not this should be true. On one hand people believe that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" make an individual right in constitution. Under this theory the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. Gun control is considered unconstitutional by many American citizens, as it should be. Gun control is laws or

Some Americans feel that because guns are already regulated in so many other countries, America should just follow suit, while others believe guns both represent and help guarantee our independence, our liberty, and our freedom to make our own decisions. The founding fathers anticipated that gun control could become a serious issue in the future, so they added the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment states: “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.“ Most gun control activists focus in isolation on the beginning of the amendment where the founders wrote that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They then try to argue that only the military or the National Guard should have access to guns, not individuals. In so arguing, however, they completely ignore the last part of the Second Amendment, which provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The founders obviously envisioned that the people would keep and use firearms to protect themselves and their country. Unfortunately many politicians don’t see it that way. Yet, the Supreme Court has struck down firearm bans again and again. The 2008 Supreme Court case, District of Columbia vs. Heller,

Gun control is one of the most talked about topics in modern day America. 43 of 50 states have the right to bear arms. Most states have to background check you in order for you to purchase or sell guns. Some other states prevent carrying guns and some other ban assault rifle weapons. People who support the gun laws say that the second amendment was meant for militias and that gun restrictions have always existed. People who oppose that say that guns are needed for self-defense from people who invade houses or are actual threats. Although both of those are correct, there will always be two sides for control laws.

The United States is home to approximately 5% of the world’s population and 31% of all mass shootings. Through these mass shootings and various other methods of gun violence, tens of thousands of people die every year. These gun-related deaths primarily originate from murder and children accidentally shooting themselves. Although those in favor of gun control tend to believe that guns should be terminated completely, the second amendment prevents lawmakers from being able to do so. Therefore, in order to combat these causes, alternative gun control solutions must be made for each one. Gun-related murders can be decreased through the use of universal background checks. Additionally, accidental shootings can be minimized through the

Gun Control has been an issue that has been brought to the public’s eyes in recent years. This main issue has been going on for many years, for example when John F. Kennedy was assassinated; it raised public awareness to the lack of control on sales and also possession of guns in America. Until 1968 guns were available over the counter in stores and through mail catalogs to just about any adult in America. This was an example of how loosely guns were regulated which bring us back to the issue of guns. The constitution tells us in the second amendment that we, as American Citizens, have the right to bear arms. But the government is trying to change that by regulating everything to do with owning a gun. My stance: Gun

“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American

Currently in the United States, there is a large debate going on about what we should do about gun control. This issue played a large role in the recent election of our president Donald Trump. In this issue, there are two sides as well as a middle section that agrees slightly with both sides. On the extreme sides of the issue, some people believe that guns should be completely not allowed in the United States, while some believe there should be no regulation whatsoever due to the second amendment rights given to us by our forefathers. Then there are the people in the middle who believe there should be some regulation, such as background checks when you purchase

My personal view on gun control is for less gun control. It makes no sense the way people place most of the blame on the tool instead of the person. The second amendment is in our constitution on our founder's belief that we should be able to own a gun to protect our liberties. Looking back in history it was privately owned guns which helped colonist defend themselves from British rule. Meaning that if our government where get out of hand we the people would have the means to defend ourselves. We are lucky to be able to do this since many other countries control their citizens lives and are unable to fight back. Gun laws are punishing laws abiding citizens. The media placing the blame of school shootings on guns is ridiculous. These are merely